Big bill for cleanup of would-be WRTA maintenance site

Tuesday

Aug 27, 2013 at 12:04 PMAug 27, 2013 at 7:25 PM

By Nick Kotsopoulos TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

WORCESTER — Environmental remediation of the Quinsigamond Avenue site where the Worcester Regional Transit Authority wants to construct a vehicle maintenance and operations facility could run as high as $15 million.

That estimate is based on the findings of environmental site investigations completed on behalf of the WRTA which confirmed the presence of "subsurface contaminants of concern" that will need to be addressed before any construction can begin there.

While the WRTA has received a $39 million federal grant to construct a 100,000-square-foot maintenance facility at 40 Quinsigamond Ave., that money cannot be used for remediation of the site, according to city officials.

As a result, the city has had discussions with state environmental officials about the potential opportunity of receiving remediation funding for the property, which at one time was the home of a manufactured gas plant operation.

Through those conversations, Richard K. Sullivan Jr., secretary of the state's Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, has identified nearly $2.2 million in state environmental funding that can be used to support brownfield remediation efforts for the WRTA project.

The City Council last week adopted a resolution authorizing the city manager to apply for and accept that grant money from the state.

Upon receipt of that grant funding, the city will enter into a subcontract with the WRTA to dedicate those funds to the project, according to Timothy J. McGourthy, the city's chief development officer.

The 10- to 11-acre parcel where the WRTA wants to build its new maintenance facility is owned by NSTAR, the Boston-based gas and electric utility.

A manufactured gas plant operated on the property from 1870 to 1969.

Gas manufacturing at that site included coal carbonization, carbureted water gas, and oil and gas, according to a report done on the property for NSTAR in 2009 by AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. of Westford.

Tar distillation also reportedly occurred there from approximately the 1930s until the 1950s, according to the report.

That report was done at a time when NSTAR excavated part of the property to install a new natural gas line there.

Demolition of the former manufactured gas plant was completed in 1975 and the building now on the property houses pipes, valves and switches that is part of NSTAR's local natural gas distribution system.

But residuals from the manufactured gas operations have seeped below the ground surface.

In a report that went before the City Council last week, Mr.McGourthy said the WRTA estimates that environmental remediation costs at the 40 Quinsigamond Ave. site could be as high as $15 million.

"While the WRTA has received a $39 million grant from the Federal Transit Authority for the construction of this facility, environmental remediation of the site is not an eligible expense with these grant funds," he wrote.

"Based on the projected environmental remediation estimates provided by the WRTA, the city has been in communication with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs to discuss the potential opportunity to receive environmental remediation funding for the 40 Quinsigamond Ave. site," he added.

The WRTA is under a federal mandate to replace its nearly 80-year-old maintenance facility on Grove Street.

The current operations center at 287 Grove St. has become functionally obsolete and requires more than $1 million just to replace inadequate systems and for repairs, according to WRTA officials.

The aging facility was converted from a trolley barn to maintain and operate buses in the 1940s, when the trolleys were phased out.

In 2011, the WRTA identified the Quinsigamond Avene property as its preferred site for a new maintenance and operations center, which is where the transit authority would house its entire fleet of 52 fixed-route buses and 16 vans.

The property is about one mile from the WRTA's new bus hub at Union Station, which transit officials said would allow for more efficient operations with minimal need for "deadheading.

Another site that had been proposed was at 115-131 Southwest Cutoff. But it was rejected from consideration because the site was too big (21.2 acres) and too far from Union Station (3.6 miles). The WRTA wants to have the maintenance and operations facility no further than two miles from Union Station.

During an informal presentation before the Conservation Commission in May, WRTA Administrator Stephen F. O'Neil pointed out that the property is also located within a floodplain.

He said the WRTA has had informal discussions with the state Department of Environmental Protection about that issue.

While the facility has yet to be designed yet, the fact that it would be located in a floodplain has raised some concerns, especially since the WRTA plans to stock on the site 10,000 gallons of diesel fuel and 5,000 gallons of gasoline for the buses.

Mr. O'Neil told the Conservation Commission he wanted to make it aware of the floodplain issues involved with the proposed WRTA maintenance facility and hear any input it might have to offer.

He said the WRTA will be returning before the Conservation Commission after the design plans are completed.

Because of environmental issues associated with past uses of the property, the site has achieved a "Class B-2 Response Action Outcome" classification from the state, based on an "Activity and Use Limitation" that was originally recorded in 1997 and then amended and ratified in 2002, according to the 2009 report done by AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. of Westford.

That limitation allows for commercial, retail and industrial uses of the property, provided that human contact with soil is limited by building structures, pavement, landscaping or other cover, the report added.

Excavation for any utility work or construction work must be conducted in accordance with a soil management plan and a health and safety plan.

Residential and agricultural uses of the property are prohibited, as well as any other use where children would be present full-time.